Halo 2 & 3 were originally one game

Bungie's Jaime Griesemer has revealed that the single-player campaigns included across Halo 2 and Halo 3 were originally designed as one game, commenting that the developer's "original plan" was "too ambitious", and that the team "had to cut our losses and just ship with what we were all happy with".

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
3204d ago Replies(7)
3204d ago
OlvaR3204d ago

but still both games where more complete than most of the games we see today...

duplissi3204d ago

yes and no.

feature wise yes

content wise yes and no the single player in both were lacking and this article discusses the obvious reason, multiplayer yeah because all you need to do now is make sure you have plenty of maps, game modes, rank system, and a decent matching system to make a competent online game today.

cayal3203d ago

"but still both games where more complete than most of the games we see today..."

I'd disagree, the ending of Halo 2 was just horrible. It was just nothing.

This coming out makes a lot of sense, it certainly feels like you just went from one level to another. There was no real sense of ending in Halo 2.

Therealspy033203d ago

Games are allowed to have cliff hangers. everyone praises games these days for being cinematic and movie-like. well i can think of tons of movies that end with a cliff hanger. back to the future. great movie right? are you going to say the back to the future trilogy was originally 1 movie? how about lord of the rings? or the matrix? name a few.

I really doubt Halo 2 and Halo 3 were one game...but they may have very well been storyboarded as one continuous story.

the point Olvar was making (i think -- not to put words in his mouth), is that the content was sufficient to be a stand alone game worthy of the 50 dollar investment. you got a decent length story capable of co-op play, and one of the first really great console multiplayer-online shooters.

this article isn't news...or interesting. it's what anyone who has ever played halo 2 already knew. the game ends making it very obvious that the conclusion to the trilogy was on its way.

you don't have to like halo, you don't have to like bungie or microsoft, but you can't deny that content-wise, halo 2 hardly shafted the consumer.

cayal3203d ago

"Games are allowed to have cliff hangers"

Of course they are, in fact I generally encourage it.
But Halo 2 just ended. I thought I was going to another level and it just stopped. That's it.

There wasn't much of a cliff hanger, no rounding up of the story, it just stopped.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3203d ago
AEtherbane3204d ago

They were both half as good as the 1st.... H:CE is still the most amazing out of all imo.

Sheikh Yerbouti3203d ago

but this article justifies all those Halo 2.5 statements made about Halo 3.

starvinbull3204d ago

That really explains a lot. Why not make 1 great game instead of 2 sub great games, still it didnt hurt sales of either.

Gamer7l3204d ago (Edited 3204d ago )

BOTH games went on to sell over 10 million copies EACH, and were released just 3 years apart. In that same timeframe, there's no way Halo 2 ALONE sells as many copies. It's pretty simple business strategy, really.

cayal3203d ago

Gamer7l - If Halo 2 and 3 were combined to make Halo 2 and if there was still going to be a Halo 3 (what ever the story may be), they'd still sell 10 million each.

starvinbull3203d ago

Disagrees for what? I only said that if they were intended as one game it would made better sense for them to remain that way.

Do people really disagree with that?

Show all comments (50)
The story is too old to be commented.